On Tuesday, February 12, representatives from the University of California Office of the President will be convening UCI to discuss the future of health care across the UCs.

Several issues are at stake for all UC students, graduates and undergraduates alike. For one, UC management is pushing to remain exempt from Obamacare standards in order to maintain lifetime caps and annual prescription coverage caps on student insurance plans. This means that any student whose patient care exceeds $400,000 a year or whose prescription needs exceed $10,000 a year will have no coverage, denying students the life-saving care they need (see http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_22453645/health-care-limits-leave-some-students-few-options for a news articles regarding this issue). On top of this, UC management plans to stick students with fee increases by an average of 25% across campuses – up to $600 a year – to pay for a deficit caused by financial mismanagement of the UC student health insurance plan.

Join your fellow students on Tuesday in front of Aldrich Hall at 10 a.m. to demand:

No fee increases. UC’s $900 million in medical center profits should be used to pay for financial mismanagement of the health plan.

UC should meet all Obamacare standards for covering life-saving care and free preventive care services.UC should eliminate all life time caps and annual prescription caps.

UC needs to see how crucial these issues are to us as students and workers, and the best way to do that is to come out and be heard

We the undersigned, are ashamed that our university has charged a student activist with physical abuse with no evidence to support these charges. At the same time, the University of California, Irvine (UCI) is failing to admit responsibility of the physical harassment that this student activist experienced by UCI administrative staff. Even more shocking, the verbiage of the policy that he was accused of violating trivializes acts of rape and sexual assault which occur with frequency at our school.

On November 8th 2012, a student activist was charged with violating Student Conduct Policy 102.08. This charge resulted from the student’s participation in a peaceful march through the UCI bookstore to highlight the ongoing privatization of the California public university system. As protesters entered the bookstore, several students were assaulted by administration and staff. Shamefully, the UCI administration continues their silence about the incident, failing to admit responsibility of the physical harassment that student protestors experienced at the hands of staff and administration. Furthermore,in an attempt to white-wash their actions, the University charged a peaceful student protestor with physical assault. This underscores the true intent of the UCI administration: to silence students who oppose the privatization of public education. According to the UC Irvine administration, students do not have the right to free speech and the right to peacefully assemble.

A further disregard of the student body is the administration’s use of theStudent Conduct Policy 102.08 Physical Abuse charge towards the student activist that states:

Physical Abuse – “Physical abuse including but not limited to, sexual assault, sex offenses, and other physical assault; threats of violence; or other conduct that threatens the health or safety of any person. (See Appendix 3).”

By lumping together all sexual and physical abuse into one charge, theStudent Conduct Policy 102.08 Physical Abuse trivializes and erases the experiences of sexual assault victims. It is problematic that the University is grouping all physical abuse, and in this case – resistance of the forcible, unjust attempt to remove student activists from the University bookstore – with all forms of sexual abuse, which is intended to dehumanize and destroy the mental and psychological stability of those sexually assaulted. This dilution of both the meanings of physical and sexual assault gravely undermines the seriousness of these offenses, in turn reinforcing violence against women and the LGBTQ community. Individuals who have experienced sexual harassment, abuse, and rape have to be taken seriously.

We, the undersigned, are indignant that UCI treats sexual violence as a light matter and feel comfortable to charge a random student activist with a serious offense they did not commit. At the same time we are outraged that the university has ignored instances of assault by its own administrative staff. This charge is a political manuever by the University of California which has been historically used to punish politically active students.

In addition to minimizing the struggle of survivors of sexual assault, by using the allegations against sexual assault, the University serves to appeal to the affects of the community in rendering legitimization of unsubstantial physical abuse charges against political activists. We refuse to allow charges of sexual assault to be used as political tools to serve the agenda of the University administration.

The University of California Irvine Student Conduct policies are archaic and do more harm than they do justice. It is clear that these policies are used to punish students engaged in political activism by capitalizing on the experiences of sexual assault survivors. Lastly, the only way to effectively deal with sexual assault and rape culture is to offer safety and assure accountability for survivors rather than trivializing their experiences. It is now obvious that this can only happen through structural changes to the university and society at large.

*This letter stands in solidarity with the women of India who are still fighting for justice for the rape and murder of a young woman in a Delhi bus by six men using an iron rod. It stands in solidarity with the women of Juarez who we have still not forgotten, with Cece McDonald, a student from Minneapolis who sits in jail convincted of second degree manslaughter for surviving a racist and transphobic physical assault, and with all the survivors of sexual assault in the U.S. and around the world.

Two FBI agents showed up at the parent’s house wanting to know information on another activist on campus.

This is how the conversation went:

FBI: Do you know X?Comrade: I do not want to talk to you, I want to talk to my lawyer.FBI: OK

Under NO circumstances talk to the FBI or any cops! ANYTHING you say can implicate your friends and yourself. Do not attempt to say something smart thinking that you are being clever in responding. Even saying “I don’t know” can result in perjury charges. Additionally, do NOT invite them into your home. This is leaves open the opportunity for the FBI to search and gather clues lying around your home. If they come to your doorway step outside, close the door behind you and say “I do not want to talk to you, I want to talk to my lawyer.” Tell them a lawyer will get in touch with them. If they do not leave ask “Am I being detained.” if they say No, WALK AWAY.

This is all intimidating, they want you to be intimidated! Do not let them coerce you into talking, you have the right to remain silent and not implicate your friends and yourself in anything. They do not look as scary as they seem, they in fact look a little douchey, twenty-something, right out of the academy. If you weren’t looking any closer, you could mistake them for Jevoha’s witnesses, or Mormons.

Regardless, treat the FBI like vampires, do not invite them in, do not talk to them, do not let their charms fool you!

Here is an excerpt Not Yr Cister Press, in response to Leah and Grand Jury subpoenas in Portland:

“Whether or not Leah provided information substantial to indictments, her cooperation facilitated the grand jury investigation. Frequently stated in grand jury resistance trainings is that answering even “harmless” seeming questions can have highly damaging outcomes. What appears insignificant could be an essential link in the prosecutor’s case. Further, stating “I don’t know” or “I don’t remember” could potentially open you up to perjury charges. Finally, the State had, until October 17, encountered a mostly solid wall of resistance. Their strategy had failed to break solidarity among anarchists. In coercing testimony from Leah, the State damaged the credibility of those who publicly resist.

This point—that even limited cooperation is harmful—cannot be emphasized enough. Saying anything to a grand jury is a problem. Say nothing.”

Solidarity with all Grand Jury Resistors, Solidarity with all activists facing political persecution. Solidarity with all prisoners.

In 2006 Progressive Labor Party member Seth Miller raped an anarchist activist who had been his close friend and a fellow organizer for many years in the Los Angeles area. The activist found no recourse in the legal system but hoped that PLP leadership would intervene and do something to hold Seth accountable for being a rapist. The party leadership did nothing despite the activist reaching out multiple times.

Early in 2012 the activist found renewed support for holding Seth accountable after learning that he had recently been part of some organizing spaces with the activist’s allies. The activist, along with a small collective of allies, approached PLP again in May 2012 to remind them of the rape and demand a process of accountability. After several weeks and a meeting between the activist, her allies, and a member of PLP leadership, the party seemed to acknowledge it was harboring a rapist but refused to act unless the activist provided “conclusive evidence” that Seth had raped her. Instead, the party leadership engaged in victim-blaming and insinuated that the activist was merely feeling guilty about consensual sex. While party leadership agreed to take up the issue, they opposed any process that didn’t conform to their terms and obstructed progress on holding Seth accountable by canceling meetings at the last minute and issuing unreasonable expectations for rescheduling.

It is now several months after those initial conversations with PLP’s new leadership, and Seth remains an operating member of PLP, though he is now based in New York City. Recently the activist found through her own investigation that the party held a secret meeting in New York in July or August during which they agreed that while there was no “conclusive evidence” to their standards proving that Seth is a rapist, they would require him to drink with a buddy from now on and write a self-criticism about his relationship to women and patriarchy. These so-called solutions do nothing to protect our communities from a known rapist.

PLP leadership has failed to acknowledge this meeting just as they have failed to protect our communities from this predator. The party has, however, asked that the activist and her allies stop spreading “gossip” about Seth because they see the activist’s rape as a private matter rather than a political matter.

PLP is incapable of promoting truly revolutionary politics because it refuses to acknowledge individual and systemic sexual violence. In response, we ask a few things of you. The first is to exclude PLP from all activism and organizing spaces. The second is to warn your allies of the fact that PLP is defending and harboring at least one known rapist. The third is to examine and address the patriarchal behavior throughout all of our activist communities that protects and promotes sexual violence. The fourth is to actively support and defend the many individuals in our community that have suffered sexual violence. Finally, we ask you to address these matters in the best way you see fit – you do not need our permission to act.

In response to the previous letter the lawyer sent to the administration (see here: UAW Lawyer’s email to the UCI admin), the Office of Student Conduct has released their first charge against a student-worker that organized and participated in November 8th’s Rally and March against UC privatization. Sure enough the charges are absurd, given that these are the same charges we accused the administration of taking against several student activists that same day. (Notice how conveniently they changed the time to say ‘you started it first’… we’ll see about that). This is how the UC chill’s student activist on campus. First brute force and then “conduct sanctions.”

On November 8th, about 200 students gathered at the flagpoles in dissatisfaction of the misplaced priorities of the University and the state in funding public education. “Prop 30 Won’t Save Us” because we have already suffered enough. Our situation as it is is not acceptable.

After the march, students and workers peacefully attempted to march through the campus to notice the heavy amount of repressive forces placed at every. Guards stood at every door of the administration building and public spaces such as the student center and the food court.

Check out the letter the UAW’s lawyer sent to the administration later on that week.